Just in your opinion only. That doesn't make it right. Including laws like two-tier policing or freedom of speech differences as non-tariff barriers in U.S. trade policy could theoretically align with national interests by pressuring trading partners to align with U.S. values, potentially leveling the playing field where regulatory differences impact trade. For example, stricter speech laws abroad might suppress market-related expression, indirectly affecting U.S. firms. However, this risks infringing on other nations’ sovereignty, as it imposes U.S. standards on domestic legal systems, inviting retaliation and straining diplomatic ties. Tariffs traditionally address trade-specific issues—subsidies, labor costs, environmental standards—where economic impacts are clearer. Expanding tariffs to cover broader legal or cultural differences muddies the waters, likely escalating disputes beyond trade. Trade issues should dominate tariff rationale to maintain focus and avoid overreach.
I'm beginning to think that the biggest mistake is democracy and giving everyone the right to vote. Half the population will be lower than average intelligence who are given exactly the same voting power as their more intelligent counterparts. Kind of bonkers really. How many anti-democratic states have embraced the nightmares of multi-culturalism, or net zero, or women with penises? None.
You've got to be kidding. The only reason Trump didn't go after his enemies via the justice dept was that he chose AGs who couldn't bring themselves to sink that low. For his second term he's solved that problem.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now